hilariously tone deaf tweet by CM Robert White

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, I’m not having this legislation. Kick the charter teachers off the SBOE too - I agree that part makes no sense. But regardless of the terrible way that the chancellor and mayor have handled reopening (which has indeed been bad) WTU has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt they DO NOT have the kids best interests in mind. They advocate only for themselves. You can say that’s the purpose of a union, which is fine, but they absolutely should not be allowed to run the schools with no oversight! Completely unacceptable.

This. All of it, but especially the bolded.

Shut the Fffffff up. Where were you when they were able to raise funding for schools?
Oh wait you’re privileged a** only cares about other privileged a**es.

Do you have a link or something that could describe the WTU efforts?

But also: there have been people in this forum saying they are WTU members, telling everyone that the union’s job is to protect its members, not advocate for children.

Oh wow seriously? So you can remember #onlywhenit'ssafe but not #fullyfundourschools?

That's hilarious. And yes, the union's main duty is to protect teachers, however prior to this I assure you they were doing very little for teachers and all their focus was on students (title 1 students specifically W 7/8) and changing impact.

“prior to this” doesn’t matter. the WTU ruined all pretense that they “care deeply about children.” as you and others have been lecturing us all year, unions represent the teachers’ interests, and that’s it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, I’m not having this legislation. Kick the charter teachers off the SBOE too - I agree that part makes no sense. But regardless of the terrible way that the chancellor and mayor have handled reopening (which has indeed been bad) WTU has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt they DO NOT have the kids best interests in mind. They advocate only for themselves. You can say that’s the purpose of a union, which is fine, but they absolutely should not be allowed to run the schools with no oversight! Completely unacceptable.

This. All of it, but especially the bolded.

Shut the Fffffff up. Where were you when they were able to raise funding for schools?
Oh wait you’re privileged a** only cares about other privileged a**es.

Do you have a link or something that could describe the WTU efforts?

But also: there have been people in this forum saying they are WTU members, telling everyone that the union’s job is to protect its members, not advocate for children.

Oh wow seriously? So you can remember #onlywhenit'ssafe but not #fullyfundourschools?

That's hilarious. And yes, the union's main duty is to protect teachers, however prior to this I assure you they were doing very little for teachers and all their focus was on students (title 1 students specifically W 7/8) and changing impact.

“prior to this” doesn’t matter. the WTU ruined all pretense that they “care deeply about children.” as you and others have been lecturing us all year, unions represent the teachers’ interests, and that’s it.

+1. They showed us that when the going gets tough and it really matters, they don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, I’m not having this legislation. Kick the charter teachers off the SBOE too - I agree that part makes no sense. But regardless of the terrible way that the chancellor and mayor have handled reopening (which has indeed been bad) WTU has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt they DO NOT have the kids best interests in mind. They advocate only for themselves. You can say that’s the purpose of a union, which is fine, but they absolutely should not be allowed to run the schools with no oversight! Completely unacceptable.

This. All of it, but especially the bolded.

Shut the Fffffff up. Where were you when they were able to raise funding for schools?
Oh wait you’re privileged a** only cares about other privileged a**es.

Do you have a link or something that could describe the WTU efforts?

But also: there have been people in this forum saying they are WTU members, telling everyone that the union’s job is to protect its members, not advocate for children.

Oh wow seriously? So you can remember #onlywhenit'ssafe but not #fullyfundourschools?

That's hilarious. And yes, the union's main duty is to protect teachers, however prior to this I assure you they were doing very little for teachers and all their focus was on students (title 1 students specifically W 7/8) and changing impact.

“prior to this” doesn’t matter. the WTU ruined all pretense that they “care deeply about children.” as you and others have been lecturing us all year, unions represent the teachers’ interests, and that’s it.

+1. Elizabeth Davis even said that. Fine, but this is why so many parents don't want WTU supporters - and definitely not members! - providing oversight for our schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, I’m not having this legislation. Kick the charter teachers off the SBOE too - I agree that part makes no sense. But regardless of the terrible way that the chancellor and mayor have handled reopening (which has indeed been bad) WTU has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt they DO NOT have the kids best interests in mind. They advocate only for themselves. You can say that’s the purpose of a union, which is fine, but they absolutely should not be allowed to run the schools with no oversight! Completely unacceptable.

This. All of it, but especially the bolded.

Shut the Fffffff up. Where were you when they were able to raise funding for schools?
Oh wait you’re privileged a** only cares about other privileged a**es.

Do you have a link or something that could describe the WTU efforts?

But also: there have been people in this forum saying they are WTU members, telling everyone that the union’s job is to protect its members, not advocate for children.

Oh wow seriously? So you can remember #onlywhenit'ssafe but not #fullyfundourschools?

That's hilarious. And yes, the union's main duty is to protect teachers, however prior to this I assure you they were doing very little for teachers and all their focus was on students (title 1 students specifically W 7/8) and changing impact.

“prior to this” doesn’t matter. the WTU ruined all pretense that they “care deeply about children.” as you and others have been lecturing us all year, unions represent the teachers’ interests, and that’s it.

+1. Elizabeth Davis even said that. Fine, but this is why so many parents don't want WTU supporters - and definitely not members! - providing oversight for our schools.

When/where did she say that? I don't doubt you at all, I just want the receipts.

[Anonymous]

yeah . . . but many of us citizens support the teachers, even if WTU are only the union of teachers. I get that you don't like them and what they do that is in their members' interests that are not in children's interests or parents' interests.

[Anonymous]

I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

That part is certainly true. It doesn't mean that the union hasn't been a major obstacle though. The mayor certainly failed to show the leadership that would have been needed to overcome it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope, I’m not having this legislation. Kick the charter teachers off the SBOE too - I agree that part makes no sense. But regardless of the terrible way that the chancellor and mayor have handled reopening (which has indeed been bad) WTU has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt they DO NOT have the kids best interests in mind. They advocate only for themselves. You can say that’s the purpose of a union, which is fine, but they absolutely should not be allowed to run the schools with no oversight! Completely unacceptable.

This. All of it, but especially the bolded.

Shut the Fffffff up. Where were you when they were able to raise funding for schools?
Oh wait you’re privileged a** only cares about other privileged a**es.

Do you have a link or something that could describe the WTU efforts?

But also: there have been people in this forum saying they are WTU members, telling everyone that the union’s job is to protect its members, not advocate for children.

Oh wow seriously? So you can remember #onlywhenit'ssafe but not #fullyfundourschools?

That's hilarious. And yes, the union's main duty is to protect teachers, however prior to this I assure you they were doing very little for teachers and all their focus was on students (title 1 students specifically W 7/8) and changing impact.

“prior to this” doesn’t matter. the WTU ruined all pretense that they “care deeply about children.” as you and others have been lecturing us all year, unions represent the teachers’ interests, and that’s it.

+1. They showed us that when the going gets tough and it really matters, they don't care.

Better than you who has done nada and continues to do nada. You support white higher SES kids and that's it. You're not in a place to judge but carry on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:yeah . . . but many of us citizens support the teachers, even if WTU are only the union of teachers. I get that you don't like them and what they do that is in their members' interests that are not in children's interests or parents' interests.

sure, then a non-union teacher can be on the board. my understanding is that declining union membership means losing some bonus money. but thems the breaks in public service - it is very common to have to resolve conflicts of interest to take public office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

no, not when one side has shown its willingness to use the nuclear option to further its own interests. that’s the union’s choice to use their power that way. and that choice means that they cannot have any role on a school board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

That part is certainly true. It doesn't mean that the union hasn't been a major obstacle though. The mayor certainly failed to show the leadership that would have been needed to overcome it.

This. The reasons that DCPS hasn't truly reopened are:

1) WTU and their supporters have obstructed reopening.
2) Bowser and Ferebee failed to reopen for those who want it and instead kowtowed to WTU.

The bottom line is that DCPS would be reopen if it wasn't for WTU interference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

no, not when one side has shown its willingness to use the nuclear option to further its own interests. that’s the union’s choice to use their power that way. and that choice means that they cannot have any role on a school board.

Very well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

no, not when one side has shown its willingness to use the nuclear option to further its own interests. that’s the union’s choice to use their power that way. and that choice means that they cannot have any role on a school board.

Very well said.

It’s funny that no one seems to notice or care that 90% of charter students are still doing DL too. I know that messes with the “WTU=evil” narrative, which is why posters on this board don’t acknowledge it. At the end of the day, they cannot allow charter teachers to serve on the SBOE and ban WTU teachers. It’s unfair and shows blatant favoritism to the charter sector. Make it fair—teachers either can or can’t, regardless of where they work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

no, not when one side has shown its willingness to use the nuclear option to further its own interests. that’s the union’s choice to use their power that way. and that choice means that they cannot have any role on a school board.

Very well said.

It’s funny that no one seems to notice or care that 90% of charter students are still doing DL too. I know that messes with the “WTU=evil” narrative, which is why posters on this board don’t acknowledge it. At the end of the day, they cannot allow charter teachers to serve on the SBOE and ban WTU teachers. It’s unfair and shows blatant favoritism to the charter sector. Make it fair—teachers either can or can’t, regardless of where they work.

The issue is that the charters follow DCPS in many cases. If not in rules, then in practice. This is -- as far as I can tell -- a matter of optics and logistics. So the WTU does have bearing on what happens in the charters.

But I'd agree that if you don't have DCPS/WTU teachers on the board, then you shouldn't have charter teachers on the board either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the union bashers are barking up the wrong tree. There are no heros or villains in this story at the end of the day. Lot of mistakes on all sides. In my opinion, the mayor and the chancellor wanted the optics of reopening. They got that and now they don’t care any more. Michelle Rhee decimated the union but what did that do - not much. The only solution is to respect each side and try to genuinely work together.

no, not when one side has shown its willingness to use the nuclear option to further its own interests. that’s the union’s choice to use their power that way. and that choice means that they cannot have any role on a school board.

Very well said.

It’s funny that no one seems to notice or care that 90% of charter students are still doing DL too. I know that messes with the “WTU=evil” narrative, which is why posters on this board don’t acknowledge it. At the end of the day, they cannot allow charter teachers to serve on the SBOE and ban WTU teachers. It’s unfair and shows blatant favoritism to the charter sector. Make it fair—teachers either can or can’t, regardless of where they work.

The issue is that the charters follow DCPS in many cases. If not in rules, then in practice. This is -- as far as I can tell -- a matter of optics and logistics. So the WTU does have bearing on what happens in the charters.

But I'd agree that if you don't have DCPS/WTU teachers on the board, then you shouldn't have charter teachers on the board either.

I agree with the bolded. Charter school teachers shouldn't be allowed to serve on the SBOE either, but there's there's a much more clear conflict of interest for DCPS teachers to not be allowed to serve.