Anonymous wrote:Salaries wouldn't grow (already lower than private sector, yes, even when you include summers, etc., off);
The excellent benefits, which were traded for lower salaries, would slowly diminish;
Professional development, already marginal, would become non-existant;
Very few bright people would go into teaching;
Many excellent tea here would leave for greener pastures.

That last one is the kicker, because it's the great benefits that keep many in the profession. That goes, and you will see teachers leaving in droves. And then the public schools will dramatically decrease in value (they are supposed to be the great equalizer), and anyone who can afford it will send kids to private. That will leave the public schools in even more of a disastrous situation. Oh but wait, that's what the GOP wants, everyone for themself, sticking up for them self only, instead of looking out for one another. The government is supposed to do what individuals cannot, for the greater good. Who does it serve to completely sink public schools?

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery County will be like Detroit, PG County, or West Virginia.

Anonymous wrote:What would happen if the union didn't exist anymore?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Calling people freeloaders just because they exercise their freedom of choice is calling them a name. For example you can say "people who don't join the union" and have a more adult argument.

What term would you use for people who receive a benefit that other people pay for?

Tax evaders

Actually, free riders. That's the definition of "free rider" - someone who uses resources, public goods, or services but does not pay for them. If you benefit from being part of the bargaining unit but you are not a member[i][u], then you are a free rider.

I am guessing a lot of the people who you would call a free rider don't actually believe they are benefiting from being part of the bargaining unit. They may believe - perhaps correctly - that they would be better off without the union bargaining on their behalf.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Calling people freeloaders just because they exercise their freedom of choice is calling them a name. For example you can say "people who don't join the union" and have a more adult argument.

What term would you use for people who receive a benefit that other people pay for?

Tax evaders

Actually, free riders. That's the definition of "free rider" - someone who uses resources, public goods, or services but does not pay for them. If you benefit from being part of the bargaining unit but you are not a member[i][u], then you are a free rider.

Anonymous wrote:Another example of MCPS at it's best.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Calling people freeloaders just because they exercise their freedom of choice is calling them a name. For example you can say "people who don't join the union" and have a more adult argument.

What term would you use for people who receive a benefit that other people pay for?

Tax evaders

Actually, free riders. That's the definition of "free rider" - someone who uses resources, public goods, or services but does not pay for them. If you benefit from being part of the bargaining unit but you are not a member, then you are a free rider.

In the MCPS example, people who chose not to join a dysfunctional union are just exercising our individual rights. Get over it.

Yes, you are, I guess -- AND you're also free riders. I don't understand why you're arguing about it. It's not an insult or pejorative, it's the economic term for people who choose to do what you are choosing to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Calling people freeloaders just because they exercise their freedom of choice is calling them a name. For example you can say "people who don't join the union" and have a more adult argument.

What term would you use for people who receive a benefit that other people pay for?

Tax evaders

Actually, free riders. That's the definition of "free rider" - someone who uses resources, public goods, or services but does not pay for them. If you benefit from being part of the bargaining unit but you are not a member, then you are a free rider.

In the MCPS example, people who chose not to join a dysfunctional union are just exercising our individual rights. Get over it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Calling people freeloaders just because they exercise their freedom of choice is calling them a name. For example you can say "people who don't join the union" and have a more adult argument.

What term would you use for people who receive a benefit that other people pay for?

Tax evaders

Actually, free riders. That's the definition of "free rider" - someone who uses resources, public goods, or services but does not pay for them. If you benefit from being part of the bargaining unit but you are not a member, then you are a free rider.